Managing for Development Results Susan Stout, Manager, OPCSRX

1. Managing for Development Results Susan Stout, Manager, OPCSRX The Third Norwegian Workshop Dialogue with WBG May 26-27, 2005

2. Today’s Discussion • Agenda on Managing for Results • Lessons on Results • Results Management within World Bank III. Frontiers in Results Management for the WB Group

3. I. Agenda on Managing for Results

4. New Partnership for Development • International Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey called for: • Improved policies and stronger institutions in developing countries • More and better aid, plus action on trade and debt, by developed countries • Shared responsibility for getting country outcomes defined a global agenda on managing for development results

5. Why is it important to focus on Results? • Knowledge and Information is Power • For implementing agencies, for consumers/recipients • Countries are in the driver’s seat, results provide the steering wheel • Goal is to improve quality of management and decision making –When accountability to client/consumer is strong, results are strong • Learning is fundamental to ‘scaling up’ and easing absorptive capacity constraints • Money not useful, or used, without ideas and data on results • Donors more concerned with accountability and results than ever • Results Agenda • IDA 13 and IDA 14 Commitments

6. What do we mean by ‘Results’ ? • Results – sustainable improvements in country outcomes • If the intervention is successful, what will be ‘the difference’ for the primary target group ? Examples: • Children are learning more • Municipalities are more efficient • Firms are earning more • HIV transmission from IDU to general population reduced • Managing for results – using information to improve decision-making and steer country-led development processes toward clearly defined goals

7. The “Art” of Managing for Results The ‘art’ of Managing for Results is defining outcomes that are: • meaningful to BOTH provider and client/consumer • measurable in a credible way • used in decision making

8. Emerging Global Framework • Focus on results throughout the development process: • at thebeginning, for strategic planning • duringimplementation, for day-to-day management • near the end, for evaluation and feedback • Action for results focuses on three pillars: • in countries, where results are achieved • within agencies, for more relevant and effective aid • in partnership, for coordination and harmonization

9. Results Agenda – Three Pillars • Pillar I: Strengthening country demand and capacity to manage for results • Pillar II: Enhancing development agencies’ contribution to country results • Pillar III: Fostering a global partnership on managing for results

10. Emerging Good Practice in MfDR • Managing for results at a national level: Algeria, Chile, Tanzania, Timor Leste, Uganda, Vietnam • Managing for results in projects and programs: • Brazil Bolsa Familia Social Protection • Nepal Education Sector Planning • Kyrgyz Republic Disaster Hazard Mitigation • Madagascar National Environmental Action Plan • Malawi HIV/AIDs • Uganda Water and Sanitation • Yemen Social Fund

11. II. Lessons on Results

12. Some general lessons on ‘Results’ • “M and E” recognized as strategic, but … • donors better at saying it is important than ‘how to do it’ • “Indicatoritis” – indicators only part of the problem – put in decision making context • Incentives matter! Distinguish and balance “M and E” for reporting and for managing • use to guide budgeting and planning • Need to focus on “Who is doing the learning” • not just for reporting to donors, or to national level • goal is to improve quality, relevance, effectiveness of project implementation - create added value

13. What are the characteristics of an effective monitoring system? • More than a list of ‘indicators’! • Clarity on who is going to use the information for what kinds of decision making • System is ‘usable’ for the level of decision making • Not every level needs every indicator! • The system is ‘operational’ – clear on who is to collect and report what data by when and to whom • Where capacities for monitoring and evaluation are limited, how will they be established? • Improved capacities to collect and use information itself a ‘result’

14. Characteristics (2) • Use simplicity and common sense as guides • Better to do a few things well than all things perfectly • Strong link between what is measured and desired outcome • Some project outcomes are ‘inputs’ to others • Don’t try to solve all problems in one project • Qualitative data (e.g. of organizational/institutional change) as important as quantitative

15. Moving Forward: Results Management in the World Bank

16. Focus • Helping operational units ask: • Are we being effective? • How do we know? • AND • Are we helping our clients to be effective? • Are we helping them to know about their effectiveness

17. Results Management Initiatives • Modernization of CAS Architecture • Results-Based CAS • CAS Completion Report • Results Orientation in Project Documentation • Revised PAD • Implementation Status and Results Report

18. Initiatives, cont. • Development of Results Monitoring and Learning System • Link with Client Services Model (OETF) • IDA 14 Results Measurement System • Strategic Performance Contracts • Final Outcomes in KPIs • Indicators of Managing for Results • CAS • Project Level • Network and Sector level Results Frameworks and Sector Strategy Implementation Update

19. Frontiers in Results Management for World Bank (Group ?) • Managing for Results as a Country System • Assessing national, sectoral capacities • Cooperation with other donors on capacity building • Assessing effectiveness of nonlending work • Moving beyond Number delivered to l) fit with distribution of strategic issues, 2) influence on country level decision making • Link with IFC on Technical Assistance?

20. Frontiers, cont.’d • Building results management ‘into the line’ • Role of Country Leadership Teams • Cross Sectoral commitment to measurement capacities and utilization of information for national/local decision making • Address gaps in national, subnational statistical capacities • Global program or Bank driven?

21. MDGs and Results/Evaluation • MDGs are indicators of overall direction • Risks of conflating MDGs with program and implementation progress indicators • Need scope for sectoral ‘inclusiveness’ around the MDGs • Water supply, rural roads examples • Pay attention to the common denominators • Absences of valid, reliable data on population, vital events at local level constrains ownership, credibility of MDG agenda

22. MDGs and Evaluation, cont • Need to link work on institutions for local accountability and measurement systems for the MDGs • Investments in basic data infrastructure are undervalued, have public goods characteristics • Little work on C/E of different information systems • E.g. DHS per participant costs are 23 times higher than those for sample registration/household surveillance • Evaluations should help clarify the ‘links in the chain’ betw/ sectoral performance and macro-outcomes